DO NOT POST YOUR VOTES ON THIS PAGE. Kindly PM both myself (Montecarlojoe) and Mike Ratledge the votes.

Decks must be released between 01/01/16 and 31/12/16

Decks that are not released in 2016 are ineligible.

Reissued versions of established decks may be declared ineligible if no significant change was made to the original design.

KS Decks must be delivered in 2016 to be considered.

KS decks that started delivery in 2015 and concluded delivery in 2016 are eligible ONLY if not voted for in the 2015 competition.

KS decks that start delivery in 2016 and concluded delivery in 2017 are eligible, but will not be eligible in the 2017 competition if voted for in the 2016 competition.

If your entry contains an ineligible deck you will be informed and allowed to re-enter.

The administrators reserve all rights to revoke anyone's participation rights should any dishonest activities be suspected.

The sponsors have all rights to change any prizes without prior notice.

Everyone is allowed to participate in the voting, including designers themselves are allowed to vote on their own decks. Any Administrators / Moderators participation will have already cast their votes prior to the contest to ensure fairness.

The Administrators / Moderators reserve all rights to amend any of the above rules without prior notice.

Voting will commence on TBA

Prizes will be picked by in order by the final placings of the awards (ie. winner gets 1st pick, runner-up 2nd pick, etc.)

The spirit of the "Best deck for Poker play" is to choose the best traditional standard deck for play in general - there are many other games we could have chosen such as Bridge, Gin or Cribbage - but poker is probably the most popular and familiar. For sake of argument when judging or selecting a deck think Texas Hold'em.

The best Deck for Poker Play should be exactly that - best for playing with - not just the prettiest deck that could conceivably be used to play.

Best non-poker deck is looking at decks that could not be used for Texas Hold'em Poker (or similar games) at all - that is a deck that does not conform to four suits (Spades, Hearts, Diamonds, Clubs - or artistic substitutes) each comprising of 10 number cards (1 or Ace through 10), and three face cards (Jack, Queen, King). You would normally expect 2 jokers (Black and Red), but having only one, or both the same colour, for whichever artistic reason would not qualify a deck on its own. nor would card marking or gimmicks (being able to cheat doesnt make them unplayable!)

Best rookie deck is looking for best Deck produces by a first time artist or producer - the platform it was made available through is not important. A new production company or trading name for someone who has previously prduced decks would not qualify.

Voting and points system

Each entry is comprised of a single vote for each category

For each category:

The votes are added up and first, second and third place decks are established

Natalia SilvaCalypso(Can cover shipping within the US, but may ask for a contribution to shipping costs to the rest of the world)

3 Russian Folk Art Red decks

3 "The Other Kingdom" Birds Edition

3 "The Other Kingdom" Animals Edition

shermjackThedissident001Tier 1A FULL SET of Carat Card Cases: One (1) of each Carat X1, X2, X3, X4, X6 and XLG (if you don't have a Legacy Deck to don't want the XLG, you can switch for any other case)

I had a brief conversation with Joe about a couple topics and he suggested to make it public, so there it goes:First, simple things: apparently, the Kings of India deck was voted for last year, so it doesn't qualify for 2016 contest. I am not sure for the Olympia deck, as delivery was also between 2016 and 2016.Heckadeck qualifies Second, non poker decks: Joe suggested two new categories, "Tarot" and "Other", other as in "Spanish suits" or, IDK, Hanafuda, Indian, Italian etc.

Third, and most complex, voting system. I find interesting the new voting system Joe proposed, but my main concern is the rewards system.

Rewarding participants on how well they guess which deck is going to be more popular is a bit unfair. It encourages to choose the best known or popular decks and not other lesser known jewels.

Also, this kind of contest usually have a nice discover new things effect which I love. I don't get that many decks a year and those usually rank up in my likings, obviously. But I might reconsider my votes upon seeing what other members suggest.

What about a two round contest? First round, candidates. Second round, voting only what has been proposed before. It's a bit similar to the Academy Awards. This system helps discovering decks, although it takes more work for all.

To be considered: only members that submit candidates can vote. Could be limiting.Also, candidates submissions are categorized or not. If not, it also could make it easier. Should be limited to a max, like 10 per user.

This system, however, doesn't address the unfair rewards system. Why, if I think of the rewards (which I don't, though) would vote for best deck a really nice reproduction Fournier just released if I am going to be alone there? Biased voting towards popularity.

What's the point of making it "a reward"? What's being rewarded? The ability to guess what the community likes more? My point is that my criteria to choose a deck is as good as the next. If all Fontaine or Madison fanboys joined here we know what would happen, or take also trends like minimalism or topics: steampunk is not better than day of the dead or zombies, but maybe not my liking. Or standard versus custom courts for example.

With so many categories and decks published, I think that thinking and building up a voting list alone should be eligible for a prize. Therefore, I propose a random generated list of all valid participants and, by order, each one chooses the desired prize.

Voting system (points) would remain unchanged, we all wanna know which is the best deck of the year!

Discussion is open!

JS

Every deck I open makes your sealed one more valuable. You're welcome.

The problem with s two round system like that is that will actually make the problem worse - the decks people THINK are popular will get nominated and then the the decks people THINK will win get voted for int eh 2nd round - only this time with a more focused sense of where general opinion lays.The nomination format might work if we had a panel of judges who could not compete who choose the winners from the top 8 nominees say. Oscars style. But then you are trying to guess the preferences of that panel so the problem remains to some degree.

The more complex voting / points system I suggested is little harder to game (but not much), and arguably better reflects the popularity of the eventual winning decks (but not much).

If we want a voting system truly based on subjective opinion and not trying to game the system then the only truly fair way to do that is to remove the skill element altogether.Basically make it a prize draw. (Using a site like this would make it fair: https://www.randompicker.com/.. )

To safeguard against fluff entries with no substance we would need extra rules:

One entry per person

UC member votes only

Entries are only considered valid if they are complete (every category voted for with an eligible deck)

Each vote must be accompanies by a reason why you like it best. This reason must have qualitative value beyond "I like it best".

(The prize draw format would work with either the straight voting or preferential voting schemes.)

Regarding deck types - new categories like "Best Tarot" or "Best Alternative Deck" might work - but there are likely not really enough new decks for those categories to work particularly well. perhaps a better way is to define "deck" e.g.A deck may be:

I think it's too late to change the current system this year. I also think with a few minor tweaks that the current system is just fine.

jsantafe wrote:Why, if I think of the rewards (which I don't, though) would vote for best deck a really nice reproduction Fournier just released if I am going to be alone there? Biased voting towards popularity.

With all the beautiful decks that came out this year, if you vote for a Fournier deck then you should be alone there. That's an utter disgrace to some of the artists that spent hours, days, weeks and months creating amazing masterpieces rather than simply changing the hue of a back with an 'F' on it that took all of 2 minutes. Dear God.Anyway, my point is that even though there are apparent flaws things always have a way of coming through in the wash. Look at all the other DOTY contests- while I may not agree with some of the winners there's still no doubt in my mind that most if not all of them deserved to be there.

Dude...Fournier, not Fontaine. Fournier as in a "USPCC brand" and "produces 16 million decks a year" and founded in 1868.

I don't mind too much about the voting system but I believe a draw would be better. Also, I proposed the 2 rounds to foster discoverability, not really to counter the prize part. Wasn't clear there, sorry.

JS

Every deck I open makes your sealed one more valuable. You're welcome.

vasta41 wrote:I think it's too late to change the current system this year. I also think with a few minor tweaks that the current system is just fine.

I agree with Vasta41 here. I think the current system works just fine and it is what we are all used to. Although the proposed system would work and certainly make it more interesting in the long run I think it would become a bit of a headache for everyone.

Over the year I have been keeping tabs on the main Kickstarter projects which have funded & shipped throughout 2016, plus a few other major releases. The list is here. If I have missed anything or there are any non-KS releases that need adding please let me know and I will adjust accordingly.

As for the scoring: the only way to stop people from gaming the system is to distribute the prizes randomly or to eliminate prizes altogether. That does take away from the fun of it and I know I have always voted with my heart, regardless of whether it put me closer or further from a prize.

Also wanted to say, as someone who has been mainly collecting Tarot last year, do you reaaally want to open that door?